Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

You'll always find one person in a crowd who finds something offensive. I remember going to the Phillies home opener a decade ago when they played the song War and some guy got all offended and complained about the Phillies using that song.

The Rays played the Yankees in the home opening series last year and then played their next home series two weeks later and it also was a weekend series. Meanwhile this year the Rays have played the Orioles and Indians with the home opening series played during the weekday. Yesterday's game drew 32.000 fans. If the Rays had two weekend series this year with one of the teams being the Yankees they would have about the same attendance as they did last year.

Reds to-do list:
1. Ask for Sal Lami, Hal Jalikakick, and Stu Pitt.
2. Put the Z-Z on both cheeks of your life.
3. Pay you five hundred dollars to come down here.
4. Open your belly up and show you all the black stuff ya got inside.

I had no idea that the White Sox were pulling in so few fans. I know that the weather has been kind of shitty, but they play in a really major market.

They've played the Royals and Mariners, mostly in bad weather. Do you really want to go sit out in 38 degrees to watch the Royals? If so, why do you hate yourself?

EDIT: But yesterday it was mostly sunny and in the 50s, and they got ~22,000 against the Mariners. Their support isn't great, but it will be better than that eventually as the weather turns, and they'll draw their customary ~2 million.

By the way, I find it neither funny nor offensive. It's just not topical -- Irwin died over 6 years ago -- nor famous enough in a US or bseball context to work. Obviously it's fine if you know who Irwin is (I do) and that he was killed by a ray (I didn't know that precisely).

That Steve Irwin got himself killed by a dangerous wild animal is flipping hilarious. If it's possible for any human being to have worked tirelessly to actively deserve that grisly fate, he achieved it.

There are people who don't understand why that sign was offensive? Seriously? Wow. Basic rule of something offensive, is making a joke about someone's death, that is pretty much common sense. It might be funny , I always loved the old joke about what it would take to get the Beatles back together, and the answer was three more bullets---before Harrison's death of course, but that doesn't mean I don't know it's an offensive joke.

Jokes on someone's death is easier to understand people taking offense about, over silly crap like calling a person a name like retard, gay, etc.

That Steve Irwin got himself killed by a dangerous wild animal is flipping hilarious. If it's possible for any human being to have worked tirelessly to actively deserve that grisly fate, he achieved it.

Seeing as how Steve Irwin did more to raise awareness about wildlife preservation and conservation, and donated tons of money to that end, this doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Jokes on someone's death is easier to understand people taking offense about, over silly crap

Except death is the one thing we all, absolutely, unavoidably, have in common. In an odd way that means that the silly crap, if less cosmically serious, is more offensive; it discriminates, and dying does not. Some of the funniest things I ever read here were jokes cracked by (the late) John Brattain at the expense of celebrity deaths, and I'm sure he'd be cracking some about his own death if he could log in from the Beyond. Since none of us knows how elegantly we're going to go, it tends to be a source of humor when somebody makes a splash upon exit.

Except … death is the one thing we all, absolutely, unavoidably, have in common. In an odd way that means that the silly crap, if less cosmically serious, is more offensive; it discriminates, and dying does not. Some of the funniest things I ever read here were jokes cracked by (the late) John Brattain at the expense of celebrity deaths, and I'm sure he'd be cracking some about his own death if he could log in from the Beyond. Since none of us knows how elegantly we're going to go, it tends to be a source of humor when somebody makes a splash upon exit.

Don't disagree that they can be funny. Heck it's great to laugh in the face of a tragedy also, but that doesn't mean it's not offensive. Part of the value of the humor is the "Oh my god, I can't believe they said that." It's a shock joke, which can be funny as heck.

It's not that hard to see funny and offensive aren't necessarily separate.

That Steve Irwin got himself killed by a dangerous wild animal is flipping hilarious. If it's possible for any human being to have worked tirelessly to actively deserve that grisly fate, he achieved it.

He wasn't really killed by a dangerous animal though, stingrays can hurt you but it terms of serious permanent damage are usually pretty harmless. His death was just a fluke, having the stinger pierce his chest.

Phil McCracken is a command.
Heywood Jablome is a request.
Mike Hunt is a statement of ownership.
Sal Lami is a lunchmeat.
Hal Jalikakick is a question.
Stu Pitt is.... someone who doesn't understand all these.

I had no idea that the White Sox were pulling in so few fans. I know that the weather has been kind of shitty, but they play in a really major market.

Didn't they stop CTA service to the stop specifically designed for the stadium? Chicago was a pain in the ass to get around before that, and godspeed to the man who wants to leave his car unattended most of the day on the south side.

I feel like there were a good number of Irwin/Tampa Bay Ray jokes among baseball fans at the time (BTW, even putting aside that the team is now presumably named after sun rays and not any sort of fish, is a stingray even the same thing as a "devil ray"?) So, I had heard this one before. But if you hadn't, and if you remember this rather dated news event, then sure, it was probably funny.

A family-friendly baseball team mascot, however, is presumably not the best way to relay the joke, at least if you own the Tampa Bay team, anyway.

Before saying I didn't understand the fake name jokes, I had changed my screen name to Holden McGroin. I didn't realize that when I changed my name back, it would change the name on the post, destroying my joke. Oh, well.

TFA does include a link to a page on Deadspin that talks about the actual sign, but it's irritating that they made you click through to a separate site for the whole story, rather than just saying what the whole thing was about in the first place.

1983: Dick Wertheim was an American tennis linesman who died from blunt cranial trauma at a match at the 1983 US Open. Stefan Edberg sent an errant serve directly into his groin, causing him to fall and hit his head on the pavement.

I think that once you've accepted crucifixion jokes and "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?", it's kind of tough to get too worked up about any joke made about any person's death. Or at least it's hard to formulate a reason for being worked up that's not totally subjective.** I thought the Rays sign was kind of droll myself, but then I had to google the guy's name before I even know what it meant.

**I can think of lots of exceptions where I would take offense, but not one that involved a celebrity stuntman who died a rather ironic death over six years ago.

I think that once you've accepted crucifixion jokes and "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?", it's kind of tough to get too worked up about any joke made about any person's death. Or at least it's hard to formulate a reason for being worked up that's not totally subjective.** I thought the Rays sign was kind of droll myself, but then I had to google the guy's name before I even know what it meant.

Again, it's not about the joke as much as it's about the mascot holding the sign (big note. It wasn't his sign, he was holding up a fans sign, so it mitigates the offensiveness of this some) You expect a certain level of professionalism and tact from "Official" licensed properties, even mascots. (outside of Cleveland, Atlanta and Washington DC)

He wasn't really killed by a dangerous animal though, stingrays can hurt you but it terms of serious permanent damage are usually pretty harmless. His death was just a fluke, having the stinger pierce his chest.

He was filming a documentary called "Ocean's Deadliest" (an all too appropriate name as it turned out), and as part of that he was swimming on top of a stingray, and if he wasn't intentionally effing with it, at best he was bothering it to the point where it felt trapped, and it lashed out.

It was caught on tape though the footage destroyed.

I am no animal lover but my view is that they should be left alone if at all possible, which includes disrupting them in the filming of documentaries (if you can do it without disturbing them, fine, but obviously Irwin couldn't), and putting them in zoos for people to gawk at them, basically.

79: agreed.
80: while i'm with you on the joke, andy - i will grant the fan that rooting for a team called 'the rays' doesn't give you much to work with.
82: that's pretty much my stance as well, ray - though i do take my children to zoos, which i guess makes me a hypocrite.

Not really, no. He was a zookeeper who made TV programs about animals, like an Australian version of Jack Hanna. This isn't one of the guys from "Jackass".

Absolutely. He was highly passionate about the animals and clearly loved interacting with them. That said, it was also (painfully, at times) obvious that he was into the rush associated with danger, so the general nature of his demise was rather inevitable, though the specific end was NOT what I ever would have anticipated. Gut feeling is that he got a bit too complacent about the ray, given that they are NOT aggressive.

Was certainly saddened to hear he had died, because whether one likes the shtick or not, the passion was admirable...and my then-toddler kids very much enjoyed his show.

All that said, I did find the sign to be darkly humorous. (Only based on his on-air personality -- so YMMV -- I also suspect Irwin would have found it funny in a "Yep, they got me!" kind of way.)

Not really, no. He was a zookeeper who made TV programs about animals, like an Australian version of Jack Hanna. This isn't one of the guys from "Jackass".

I disagree. He made a big show (both literally and figuratively) of effing with animals, particularly crocodiles, in order to... well, I don't know why, exactly, since I'm not Irwin. Prove that he could? Make money? Become a celebrity? I just know that he did it.

I remember my reaction to Dale Earnhardt's untimely demise was similar to Irwin's; my only surprise about Earnhardt was that it took him that long to get himself killed in a wreck. Dude was a brilliant driver; he also drove like a lunatic. (Though, remarkably, that's not why he got killed; that was just a freak accident that could have happened to anyone.)

I remember my reaction to Dale Earnhardt's untimely demise was similar to Irwin's; my only surprise about Earnhardt was that it took him that long to get himself killed in a wreck. Dude was a brilliant driver; he also drove like a lunatic. (Though, remarkably, that's not why he got killed; that was just a freak accident that could have happened to anyone.)

I don't think your parenthetical about it being a freak accident (within the context of an inherently dangerous activity, of course) is correct. I don't know anything about racing so I would never have been able to pick this up on my own, but I recall at the time that commentators said Earnhardt was trying to pull a risky block move or something to box out some racer from another "team" and it went wrong.

always puzzles me when some lion or tiger is put down after a person gets itself mauled at a zoo

the predator is just doing what nature requires it do. what is the reasoning in having it killed?

Same reason why if a bird turds on my car, I go out and cook a chicken outdoors so that the birds can see what will happen to them if they keep it up. By killing the predator it sends a message to the other predators to not prey on people. :)

the predator is just doing what nature requires it do. what is the reasoning in having it killed?

If it kills a handler, it obviously poses a risk to them, being too big or too aggressive or whatever. Added to that, that it has received positive feedback from its decision to go on the attack makes it more likely to be similarly aggressive and less likely to respect handlers in the future. So there's valid reasons to do away with it.

Now, if it just kills some random lunatic entering their enclosure, that seems rather unfair. Still, it's validation of aggression against humans.

I don't know anything about racing so I would never have been able to pick this up on my own, but I recall at the time that commentators said Earnhardt was trying to pull a risky block move or something to box out some racer from another "team" and it went wrong.

He was, but the blocking is something everyone did, and does, at superspeedways; it's the nature of racing there. In fact there was a quote from Tony Stewart a few days before Earnhardt's death wherein he complained about superspeedway racing and how dangerous blocking was.

Earnhardt was running in third place, the two cars he owned (one driven by his son) were running 1-2 in front of them, and the story goes that with a flagging car he was trying his best to keep the rest of the field off them. I honestly doubt that had a lot to do with it, though; he was a race car driver and I'm sure his primary concern was himself finishing as high as possible. He wrecked on the last of the race's 1000 turns, and was presumably trying to stay in third place because it was worth more points than fourth place.

always puzzles me when some lion or tiger is put down after a person gets itself mauled at a zoo

the predator is just doing what nature requires it do. what is the reasoning in having it killed?

They really should have some kind of deterrent to people climbing those walls in zoos. Like a dangerous animal that will maul and kill them if they do, or something.

Same reason why if a bird turds on my car, I go out and cook a chicken outdoors so that the birds can see what will happen to them if they keep it up. By killing the predator it sends a message to the other predators to not prey on people. :)

In the weeks following Irwin's death, at least ten stingrays were found dead and mutilated on the beaches of Queensland, with their tails cut off, prompting speculation as to whether they might have been killed by fans of Irwin as an act of revenge.[101] Michael Hornby, a friend of Irwin and executive director of his Wildlife Warrior fund, condemned any revenge killings, saying that "We just want to make it very clear that we will not accept and not stand for anyone who's taken a form of retribution. That's the last thing Steve would want."[102]

because I have put that question to members of the Milwaukee zoo and nobody will respond with anything animal related.

these are wild animals. they are always dangerous

and while I have not been surrounded by wild tigers or the such I am an outdoorsmen and have been around wild animals all my life. killing an animal bcause it followed its innate programming makes no sense to me

He was, but the blocking is something everyone did, and does, at superspeedways; it's the nature of racing there. In fact there was a quote from Tony Stewart a few days before Earnhardt's death wherein he complained about superspeedway racing and how dangerous blocking was.

I was under the impression that Earnhardt had a more dangerous driving style than was/is the norm on the track. From wiki:

His aggressive driving style earned him the nickname "The Intimidator".
...
The 1986 season saw Earnhardt win his second career Winston Cup Championship and the first owner's championship for RCR. He won five races and had ten Top 5 and sixteen Top 10 finishes. Earnhardt successfully defended his championship the following year, visiting victory lane eleven times and winning the championship by 489 points over Bill Elliott. In the process, Earnhardt set a NASCAR modern era record of four consecutive wins and won five of the first seven races. In the 1987 season, Earnhardt earned his nickname "The Intimidator" after spinning out Elliott in the final segment of "The Winston", a non-points event now known as the NASCAR Sprint All-Star Race. During this race, Earnhardt was briefly forced into the infield grass, but kept control of his car and returned to the track without giving up his lead — a maneuver now referred to as the "Pass in the Grass" even though Earnhardt actually didn't pass and couldn't have passed anyone for position as he was in the lead at the time.

My friend didn't find it that funny that I chose to show him the funeral home scene from the Big Lebowski when he was grieving his grandmother's death...... I, on the other hand thought it would have been the perfect pick-me-up.

and while I have not been surrounded by wild tigers or the such I am an outdoorsmen and have been around wild animals all my life. killing an animal because it followed its innate programming makes no sense to me

Evolution, if you kill the predators that harass humans, the ones that don't harass humans will have more offspring than the ones who do, eventually given enough generations the species as a whole will be less human unfriendly.

For instance, in Africa where humans and lions have co-existed for thousands of generations, lions generally avoid livestock enclosures- that's because for hundreds of generations lions who went after the animals in such enclosures were more likely to be killed than ones who didn't.

killing an animal bcause it followed its innate programming makes no sense to me

Animals in zoos aren't tame, but they aren't exactly wild either, they have grown up with humans in an artificial environment and get fed. It's not the animal's fault if they handle that environment badly, but on the other hand it's a safety issue for the humans. It's not like you can release a zoo animal in the wild just like that.

Evolution, if you kill the predators that harass humans, the ones that don't harass humans will have more offspring than the ones who do, eventually given enough generations the species as a whole will be less human unfriendly.

...

Of course none of that justifies killing a zoo animal

Well, yeah. In the zoo or Siegfriend/Roy setting, there is no "harrassing of humans" going on. The beings being harrassed are the animals.